Loading...
11-07-2007 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES -FINAL 7 November 2007 Committee Members Present: Committee Members Absent: Jon Califf Donnie DeWees Craig Wheeler Joe Woollett Bill Cathcart Staff in Attendance: Ted Reynolds, Assistant City Attorney Daniel Ryan, Senior Planner, Historic Preservation Robert Garcia, Associate Planner Doris Nguyen, Associate Planner Sonal Thakur, Assistant Planner Sandi Dimick, Recording Secretary Administrative Session - 5:00 P.M. The Committee met for an administrative session beginning at 5:15 p.m. Chair Wheeler asked about item #7, where there were two issues to resolve, whether there would need to be two motions for this item. Mr. Reynolds, Assistant City Attorney, responded they could do that or apply the motion to both issues. Committee Member DeWees asked for the additional information on the Prestininzi Residence. The Committee reviewed the additional information. Committee Member Woollett clarified whether they could move an item to the consent section. Chair Wheeler responded that they could not move the item; however, the item could be approved without discussion. The item could be handled in this manner when it came up on the Agenda. Administrative Session closed at 5:25 p.m. Regular Session - 5:30 P.M. The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:07 p.m. to the next regular scheduled meeting on Wednesday, November 21, 2007. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Opportunity for members of the public to matters not listed on the Agenda. address the Design Review Committee on No public attendees addressed the Design Review Committee on matters not listed on the Agenda. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 2 of 18 CONSENT ITEMS: All matters that are announced as Consent Items are considered to be routine by the Design Review Committee and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of said items unless members of the Design Review Committee, staff or the public request specific items to be removed from the Consent Items for separate action. 1) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: NONE 2) DRC No. 4280-07 -ORANGE SQUARE FACADE CHANGE A proposal to expand the canopy of an existing building. 1805-1845 E. Chapman Avenue Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714-744-7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve DRC No. 4280-07, Orange Square Facade change by consent, subject to the conditions contained in the Staff Report. SECOND: Jon Califf AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Bill Cathcart MOTION CARRIED. 3) DRC No. 4286-07 -FRESH & EASY SIGNAGE A proposal to change the existing sign program to allow new signage for a new grocery store at an existing commercial center. 146 S. Main Street Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714-744-7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Committee Member DeWees made a motion to approve DRC No. 4286-07, Fresh & Easy signage by consent, subject to the conditions contained in the Staff Report. SECOND: Joe Woollett AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Bill Cathcart MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 3 of 18 AGENDA ITEMS: 4) DRC No. 4225-07 - McCAUSLAND RESIDENCE A proposal for a second story addition to an existing single-story residence. 1021 Rose Avenue Staff Contact: Sonal Thakur, 714-744-7239 sthakur@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Staff Assistant Planner Sonal Thakur provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Drew McCausland, address on file, stated they had taken into consideration the DRC's suggestions and had made changes accordingly. The changes included moving the second-story back behind the ridge which gave asingle-story element in the front, the roof had been rotated 90 degrees to reduce the mass and scale, plate height had been lowered, and the stucco and gable vents had been added to match the existing house. It was noted on the plans that the siding, windows, and paint colors would match the existing house. Grass landscaping added and noted in the plot plans. With the changes to the design the floor area ratio was 2% larger than the largest lot on the street. Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee. Committee Member Califf asked what generated the particular design for the grass area. Mr. McCausland stated that it was generated by the recommendations by the DRC and the gravel area would be used to park a motor home. Committee Member DeWees made some further suggestions on lawn and shrub areas. Chair Wheeler stated he had recommended that the vents match the existing property; however, looking at the design, triangular vents might look better. The Committee reviewed the new drawing and plans. Committee Member Califf asked Staff if all zoning issues had been satisfied. Ms. Thakur responded that yes they had been satisfied. Chair Wheeler asked Staff in reviewing the property profiles had there been any attempt to determine how many of the assessor's profiles were accurate. Ms. Thakur stated staff had gone through available microfiche and on the records listed only the square footage of the original house was contained in the records. On the property at 934 E. Rose it went up .25 from .21 so there were cases where square footage had been added but not noted in the property profiles. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 4 of 18 Committee Member Woollett stated he had concerns about the second-story as there were not others in the area. The applicant had been responsive to suggestions to mitigate the second-story. It was still asecond-story, in looking at it from the west side it was still very apparent and he felt it would be a mistake to allow asecond-story to be built in the area. Committee Member Califf asked if they wanted any further landscape review, possibly more description in plant materials, irrigation, and shrub placement. Chair Wheeler stated it would be a good idea to have Staff review any landscape plans. Committee Member Califf made a motion to approve DRC No. 4225-07, McCausland Residence, with the following conditions: 1. To change round gable vents with triangular vents or something different. 2. The applicant to provide specific landscape and irrigation information on the plot plan. SECOND: Donnie DeWees AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler NOES: Joe Woollett ABSENT: Bill Cathcart MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 5 of 18 5) DRC No. 4227-07 - GALLERIA L'ORANGE A proposal to change the exterior colors and material for the existing commercial center. Proposal includes changes to the approved Fresh & Easy approved colors. 130-146 S. Main Street Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714-744-7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Staff Associate Planner Robert Garcia provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Pete Kutzer, address on file, stated that the Staff had done a good job in assisting with a project that was good for the center, good for the tenants, and good for the community. Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee. Committee Member Woollett asked for color samples to review. Mr. Garcia pointed out the colors that would be used, noting the color Roman Brick had been eliminated. He also brought forth a sample of the slate that would be used in the design. Chair Wheeler was confused on note #6, which stated remove existing the to add a plaster base, the drawings seem to be showing a plaster base and also the color Roman Brick was still listed on the drawings. Mr. Kutzer stated there would be a the base and the Roman Brick color had been changed. Committee Member DeWees stated the color board was correct. The Committee reviewed the color board. Mr. Garcia stated the color sequence was listed on the cover sheet. Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve DRC No. 4227-07, Galleria L'Orange, with the following additional condition: That the bases be the in accordance with the Staff Report and not the plaster that was noted in the drawings. SECOND:Joe Woollett AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:Bill Cathcart MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 6 of 18 6) DRC No. 4267-07 & MNSP No. 0525-07 -WELLS FARGO BANK BUILDING A proposal to construct a 6,064 sq. ft. bank building to replace the one that burned down. 2535 N. Tustin Street Staff Contact: Doris Nguyen, 714-744-7223, dnguyen@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Staff Associate Planner Doris Nguyen provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Brett Marchi and Paul Kielsmeier, addresses on file, were present to answer any questions. Mr. Kliesmeier stated that Wells Fargo was anxious to begin full business again as they had lost approximately 75% of business banking customers as they were unable to handle the business transactions at the temporary trailer sites. They had been working hard and long with Staff to get approval, as the intent was to open by the second quarter and would accept any recommendations for conditions of approval from the DRC. Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee. Committee Member Woollett asked how they were able to eliminate the parking area on the south side of the building and still meet parking requirements. Mr. Marchi stated it worked to have the parking toward the center and the bank to be located toward the corner. The layout was much better with the new design. Chair Wheeler was concerned about the color scheme as it seemed to differ from the other buildings in the center. Mr. Marchi stated Wells Fargo had a standard color palette and was used for the design; if there was a big objection to the colors it could be changed. He also noted that on the tower elements, on the west side, there had been signs; what is proposed now, is to add windows that would match the east side elevations. Chair Wheeler stated on the west elevation, reviewing the drawings, it was shown as a hip and a gable on the front elevation. Mr. Marchi stated that it should be a gable end. Chair Wheeler wondered if it would look softer if there was a hip at each end. 1VIs. Nguyen stated the other buildings in the center had more rounded gable designs. Chair Wheeler was concerned with the arches, and how they appeared to just blend right into a wall. Mr. Marchi pointed out on the drawings the connection to the street and the stairway off of Tustin and the arches that were added as a walkway. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 7 of 18 Ms. Nguyen asked if the Committee had a recommendation for the color scheme. Committee Member Woollett commented that he liked the colors. Committee Member DeWees stated that he was fine with the colors, and the addition of windows would add to the design. Regarding the wainscotting on the towers, they were tall with a small footing from a proportional standpoint and had they considered moving it up to the door height and it was just a suggestion. Mr. Marchi asked if it would be on the west side and wrap around the corner. Committee Member DeWees stated it would be on the west and north elevations. On the entry the pilasters seemed thin. Widen the pilasters for the entry facing the north. In reviewing the drawings and figuring out the arch, one seemed steep while the other seemed flat. In calculating the arch, the radius of the segmented arch should be the width of the opening so they would all be the same geometrically and they would all match. He also asked if they could find an alternative for the foam cornice, either wood or no trim at all. Mr. Kielsmeier stated that they could take it off and have a clean band or could have a reveal at the top. The mechanical equipment would still be hidden behind the parapet. It would not be above the roofline. Committee Member Woollett, looking at the landscape design, liked the idea of the planting on the side of the building and asked what were the plans for future maintenance. Mr. Marchi stated they would use a screen that had a green matte finish. Mr. Kielsmeier stated the product used would be Green Screen which was made specifically for growing plant materials; it took into consideration the heat element and was made of material that encouraged plant growth. Senior Landscape Coordinator, Howard Morris stated the City required plant inspection notes and the applicant would need to submit those for approval. Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve DRC No. 4267-07 and MNSP No. 0525-07, Wells Fargo Bank Building, with the following conditions: 1. Arches at the ends of portico be omitted. 2. Omit cornice. 3. All arches to have the same proportions. 4. Landscape and irrigation plans to be submitted to the City for final approval. 5. Increase the width of the columns in the entryway. SECOND:Donnie DeWees AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:Bill Cathcart RECUSED:None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 8 of 18 7) DRC No. 4270-07 - PRESTININZI RESIDENCE A proposal for a new in-fill construction of a 718 sq. ft. single family residence to be constructed on the front of an existing 622 sq. ft. addition. The DRC will also review Historical & Architectural Assessments on the prior demolition. 804 E. Washington Avenue, Old Towne Historic District Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Staff Senior Planner, Daniel Ryan provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. He stated there would be two actions; one to review and file the historic report and secondly to make a final determination. Staff is looking at the project as a reconstruction, as there was not an existing structure to mitigate and the issues had been resolved previously at a Staff level. The applicants, Francine and Craig Prestininzi, address on file, were present. Mr. Prestininzi stated that this had been a process that had begun three years ago. They had run into a structural deficiency during a wall upgrade. When the contractor took out the doors and windows, the structure collapsed. Unfortunately, they made a mistake and the City was not notified. After reviewing the collapse with the contractor and taking various photos the only thing the City had requested them to save were the studs as all other finishes per the permits were to be new. They went forward with the assumption that they had received the necessary permits for the work that needed to be done. A stop work order was received and for the past 18 months he and his wife had been living in the back of the house working with the City to try to get the process started again. Mr. Perstininzi stated that he had met with former residents, local historians and research at the library to meet the historical standards. He asked the Committee to allow them to go forward with the project; the plans were almost 100% of what they were before. One change is that the house had been moved, after being informed by the City Attorney that they had lost their legal right to rebuild on a portion of the property, they were denied a variance, and forced to shift the residence over. Public Comment Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the OTPA, stated the replacement structure was inmaterial. He felt that the project had not gone through the proper environmental reviews, as this was the final determination. Was the City claiming an exemption from CEQA review, as this was a project where permits had been issued this project was not exempt from CEQA review. There must be an environmental review to mitigate the demolition of a historic resource and establish some guidelines for reconstruction. The demolition was part of the project and had not been addressed for Design Standards. The Design Standards state: the demolition of a contributing structure must be reviewed by City Council. This had not occurred. It was the OTPA's view that the City blatantly ignored its own preservation and demolition ordinances, since neither was going to be discussed or applied to the project. He did agree that the City and applicant must go forward and build something; however, the project could not be treated as a simple in-fill project and ignoring the illegal demolition so it would not occur again. This project must go through the legal review process so it would not happen again. The City of City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 9 of 18 Orange and its property owners had a huge investment in the district and needed to discourage individuals from demolishing their contributing structures. If the applicant had come forward with the project that included the demolition of the residence his project would have been denied. We urge the City to apply the demolition and Design Standards to this project. Mr. Prestininzi stated they had been living without a home for almost two years and have been paying a penalty for an accident that happened on the job site. Chair Wheeler opened the item to the Committee for discussion. Mr. Ryan stated the Planning Manager and the City Attorney had discussed whether CEQA applied and had made a determination that there was no resource so no mitigation issue. As it seemed a departure from previous decisions, however based on their review they concluded that since the resource was no longer available and the avenue to take would be reconstruction. It did appear to be an issue between some preservationists and the determination of what the City should do when a demolition would take place in a similar situation. Committee Member Califf stated if it was a change in policy they would need to explain what the difference was. It was not up to the Committee to decide whether something was demolished intentionally and how did Staff come up with their determination. Mr. Ryan had spoken with the Environmental Specialist, Jennifer Le, and it was determined that the literature was reviewed and since the resource no longer existed there was not an opportunity to mitigate it. No negative or mitigated declaration was required. Committee Member DeWees questioned whether there was any documentation that presented this explanation and had it been provided to anyone. Mr. Ryan stated there was an email and a memo regarding the decision. Mr. Ryan had spoken with Mr. Sheatz, Assistant City Attorney, and one of the difficulties on the item was the issuance of a rehabilitation permit, it wasn't a direct demolition, but during the process the structure caved in. It was difficult to prove that it was an intentional demolition. The particulars of the item had been totally discussed between the City Attorney, Jennifer Le, and other Staff involved. Committee Member DeWees asked why the City was not better prepared. Clearly the applicant and OTPA had completed their research and were ready to move forward. Mr. Ryan stated when a property was demolished we would provide history research. If a person would come to the City and request a demolition we would still require this particular information from them. His understanding was to provide historical documentation, and this was a requirement to mitigate the demolition, regardless whether it was intentional or not, and the information provided was sufficient. Committee Member DeWees stated the only documentation was the paragraph that read environmental determination and that the project was Categorically Exempt from CEQA. There was not a letter or a report that gave any further detail. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 10 of 18 Mr. Reynolds explained that the issue had been previously reviewed and Staff had not anticipated that it would become an issue during the review of the project. Mr. Ryan stated there had been conversations with the OTPA regarding when an Environmental Impact Report was not required. Mr. Frankel stated there was no formal discussion, just informal with Jennifer Le while attending a conference together. They were told by one of the leading CEQA land use preservation attorneys in the state, if permits were pulled that CEQA applied. Mitigation of the demolition applied regardless of the demolition being intentional or unintentional. A historic resource had been lost; the project should be treated as if the structure still stood. He felt the City had erred and it needed to go through the proper channels and reviews. Committee Member DeWees asked why City Council had not reviewed the issue. Mr. Frankel felt the reason it had not been brought before City Council was due to the fact that City Staff had made a determination since the resource no longer existed that CEQA could not be applied. Mr. Reynolds stated that there was the ability to appeal the decisions made by the board. Mr. Ryan stated once the demo took place, CEQA no longer applied and the project would be treated as an in-fill project and it was the direction taken by Staff. Committee Member Woollett felt he understood clearly the action that had been taken by the City, and there had been similar situations. On projects where the structure was so unsound and the idea, aside from any legal aspects, in keeping the building was not an option. Why would a structure be preserved if there was nothing to preserve and there was precedent to be considered. When a project was approved for reconstruction, it could be found that it could not work at all and he felt that they had seen this issue in the past. It would be inappropriate to not consider the fact that there was a building that was not serviceable, and it could have been taken apart piece by piece with some salvage, but he understood the Department of Interior's Standards allowed for different conditions and different approaches to be taken. He felt the City should acknowledge that there were different approaches to be taken based on the historical significance of the building. The historical finding stated that no important person resided in the residence. When something was gone it could not be mitigated. Mr. Prestininzi stated the only historical remnants were the roof trusses and siding. The siding was made of vertical 1 X 12's which were termite infested; they had permits for 9' ceilings and the new roof. If the phone call had been made to notify the City of their findings what would have been the process, would they have been required to preserve the 1 X 12's inside of the new walls. If that was the mitigation process he did not understand how this would assist anyone. Committee Member Califf stated that projects needed to be looked at on a case-by-case basis and what had been lost. Single wall construction was not that uncommon in the City, they were found in the built-by-yourself type of houses. There were ways to construct using the existing 1 X 12's and there had been successful remediations. Mr. Prestininzi stated that the vertical siding was completely unusable. Committee Member Califf stated that because he was the only one that determined that they could not make a judgment on that issue. They wanted to avoid making decisions that would encourage midnight demolitions that had occurred in the past and establish a clear process on dealing with those types of issues. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 11 of 18 Committee Member DeWees stated when the Committee received their binders and reviewed the items they knew this project would have issues. He had driven by the site several times, the OTPA had come prepared, the applicant had come prepared and in reviewing the item the City did not seem prepared. He felt it was unfair to the applicant and to OTPA's efforts. The Committee needed to solve it for them, to resolve it so the applicant could have their home and have some type of precedent set for future issues that would come before the Committee. Mr. Ryan stated he agreed and that the Committee needed to hear from the personnel that made the decisions in a different arena. It was up to the Committee to look at the items before them and make a finding based on the application. Committee Member Woollett stated they should look very carefully at what they were being asked to do, in looking at the historical review and assessment it would have to be accepted before they could make a determination on the proposed replacement and not make a determination based on the legal issues. He suggested that they act on item #1 first which dealt with the historical resource and physical assessment. He felt the building was in very bad condition and in a historical resource category and it would not require any extraordinary preservation measure. Chair Wheeler clarified on the historical resources page, the shed-like addition was written as being on the west side and should be listed as the east side. Mr. Prestininzi stated it should be corrected to read east side. Chair Wheeler asked the Committee to act on item #1. Committee Member Woollett made a motion to accept the historical resource and physical assessment on DRC No. 4270-07, Prestininzi Residence. SECOND:Donnie DeWees AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:Bill Cathcart RECUSED:None Committee Member Califf asked what the siding would be made from. Mr. Prestininzi stated it would be 6" lapped siding to match the existing back portion of the residence. Committee Member Califf stated it would not have been approved on the original permit. Chair Wheeler noted that on the original application it was written as 6" wood lapped siding. He had concerns about the front porch and would this be rebuilt. Mr. Prestininzi stated it would be rebuilt. There would be 4 X 4 columns with latticework in between, the proportions of the residence changed. The pop out buffet would also be removed. The front residence was raised floor and in moving the house over 2 feet, there were water and utility lines that ran the length of the house, to avoid having to move these they were going to install slab on grate. With the last permit it called for raised flooring. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 12 of 18 Committee Member Woollett stated the requirement for foundation walls did not require deep footing. Mr. Prestininzi stated in order to have a crawl space, they needed 10" joist with another foot below that. Committee Member Woollett felt he could not approve this without a raised floor and asked if the residence that was demolished had a raised floor. Mr. Prestininzi stated the finished floor was going to be the same regardless of having a raised floor or slab on grade. To achieve the proper footing and crawl space they had to dig down and the grade of the flooring did not change, it did not have a very deep crawl space. Committee Member Califf stated they were looking at this project in two ways; what had been there and then as a new in-fill design and was it important to raise the floor. Should they be replicating what was there or creating a new in-fill structure. Committee Member Woollett was concerned about how it would visually affect the height. Mr. Prestininzi stated that visually it would not affect the height. The demarcation between the existing and old slab on grade was at the same level as the raised floor and they would just be matching it. Committee Member Woollett asked if there were any footings and what was the condition of the soil. Mr. Prestininzi stated that there had been concrete pumped under the house in one area and they found concrete piers in various areas. When they initially moved in there were sloped areas in the flooring. He also stated he would need to find a soils engineer to determine the compaction. Committee Member Califf asked how had it happened with the previous approval having slab on grade and what had the Committee previously approved. The Committee Members reviewed the plans and Committee Member DeWees noted the previous approval read exposed concrete footing to match historical standards. Chair Wheeler felt the original design was cottage style and it was being turned into a craftsman style. He did not like the outlookers or the stone area, as this residence was a cottage and not a craftsman and he would ask the applicant to move in the direction of the original residence. Mr. Prestininzi stated they would be happy to make any changes that Staff recommended. Committee Member DeWees suggested that they had recommended dialing the stone back from the bottom and just placing it on two columns. Mr. Prestininzi asked if they could add a window to the front portion of the house. Chair Wheeler stated that he did not have a problem with the window addition. Mr. Ryan stated there was a difference in looking at the project as an in-fill or as new construction. Committee Member Califf clarified that they should be looking at the project as an in-fill. Committee Member DeWees asked if they moved on the project what the City would do about the other issues that were brought up. Mr. Ryan stated if the Committee determines that it should be a replica of what had been there previously they would go in that direction. Staff was looking at the project as an in-fill project based on the environmental review. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 13 of 18 Chair Wheeler stated the project should be treated as a design issue and the legal aspects would be subject to an appeal and it should be approved or denied based on the design issues of the project. Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve item #2 on DRC No. 4270-07, Prestininzi Residence, subject to the additional conditions: 1. Outlookers shown on the drawings be removed. 2. The underside of the extended barges and eves be treated the same as on the original structure. 3. The stone on the base of the porch columns be omitted and the porch columns remain as close as possible to the original porch. 4. An additional window be added to the west side of the building. 5. Siding on the structure should match the siding on the back house. SECOND:Joe Woollett AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES:None. ABSENT:Bill Cathcart RECUSED:None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 14 of 18 8) DRC No. 4281-07 -RAKER RESIDENCE A proposal for window and door modifications to an existing 1918 Bungalow. 492 N. Olive Street, Old Towne Historic District Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan(a~cityoforange.org Item continued from DRC meeting of October 3, 2007 DRC Action: Final Determination Staff Senior Planner, Dan Ryan provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report noting that the applicant had returned to discuss the placement and type of window being installed over the kitchen sink area. Applicant, Jim Becker, address on file, reviewed the plans with Staff. He stated they determined that there had been an addition to the residence and placing a larger single window would look much better aesthetically from the outside. From the inside it would give more cabinet room in the microscopic kitchen. Chair Wheeler asked if it would be possible to move the existing double window over. Mr. Ryan stated that there was the option to recycle the existing windows. Mr. Becker stated that the windows were in very bad shape and the property owner wanted to eventually replace all the windows in the house. They had been to Renaissance Windows and had schematics drawn up to recreate the existing windows. Public Comment Janet Crenshaw, address on file, representing OTPA, stated that she felt the existing windows that do not slide up and down could be repaired. Jeff Frankel, address on file, representin O~TPA, stated they would like to see existing historic fabric remain; existing windows especially since they were functional. He felt it was not necessary to install new windows. Chair Wheeler opened the item to the Committee for discussion. Committee Member Califf stated there were people who could rehabilitate the old windows and make them functional. As far as energy efficiency, that would not be a consideration, when it comes down to replacing existing historic fabric. Using the existing windows would be his preference. Mr. Becker asked where Title 24 would come into place. Committee Member Califf stated it would take effect on a new addition. Chair Wheeler stated in taking out the sliding door and adding a much smaller door the applicant would be in a much better situation than what it was. Mr. Becker, referring to the drawings, pointed out the vinyl windows that would be replaced with wood. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 15 of 18 Committee Member Califf clarified the concern was with existing windows that they be preserved if possible. Mr. Becker stated he preferred one larger window in the kitchen area; if it was the determination of the Committee to keep the existing windows he would redesign the kitchen around those windows. Committee Members agreed that would be the best solution. Committee Member DeWees made a motion to approve DRC No. 4281-07, Raker Residence, with the exception of changing out of the kitchen window and utilizing the existing windows. SECOND:Craig Wheeler AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:Bill Cathcart RECUSED:None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 16 of 18 9) DRC No. 4290-07 - GLOS RESIDENCE A proposal fora 395 sq. ft. one-story addition (exceeds 20% of existing floor area) and 220 sq. ft. rear porch on an existing 1,664 sq. ft. one-story contributing Hip Roofed Cottage. 816 E. Culver Avenue, Old Towne Historic District Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Recommendation to the Planning Commission Staff Senior Planner, Daniel Ryan provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Kurt Beckmeyer, address on file, stated he had worked closely with the client and Staff. He noted that the detail on the door design was not complete and they would come up with something that was complimentary with the existing doors and the screen details would also match. He agreed with the conditions and recommendations made by Staff. Public Comment Janet Crenshaw, address on file, representing the OTPA, stated the project had a good design and the barn was very nice. Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the OTPA, stated this was a good positive project and there was good attention to detail. It was sensitive to the streetscape. Chair Wheeler opened the item to the Committee for discussion. Chair Wheeler asked about the pitch of the shed roof. Mr. Beckmeyer stated there were height restrictions on the original construction of the house, and it would have been a continuation of the primary roof plane. As the addition was kept separate from the original house it led them to the tucking under of the roof. Chair Wheeler stated this was a foreign element that did not exist anywhere else. Mr. Beckmeyer stated that on the addition it was tucked under the roofline. Chair Wheeler suggested a hip roof to match pitch for the shed area. He asked if doors would be added to the screened porch. Mr. Beckmeyer stated there would be screen doors. Chair Wheeler, in pointing out the back screened porch, was concerned that they would run into steel on the lateral forces, could there be another approach that would not require steel Mr. Beckmeyer stated they tried to keep the screened porch as open as possible. He did not have a concern about getting steel tubes in the corner without being seen. Chair Wheeler suggested something less informal for the screened-in porch, to add a Dutch gable seemed too formal. Committee Member Woollett asked on the site plan there was impervious pavement around the back and the barn. Mr. Beckmeyer stated it was all existing and shown for calculation purposes only. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 17 of 18 Chair Wheeler made a motion to recommend to the Planning Commission approval of DRC No. 4290-07, Glos Residence, with the following condition: 1. To add hip roof over shed area to match the main residence. SECOND:Joe Woollett AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:Bill Cathcart RECUSED:None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007 Page 18 of 18 ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Committee Member DeWees to adjourn to the next regular meeting on Wednesday, November 21, 2007. SECOND: Jon Califf AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: Bill Cathcart RECUSED: None MOTION CARRIED.